GregA
Dec 31, 10:53 PM
On Demand. This category amongst cable companies are expanding very rapidly and offering free content left and right. Good example is HBO, nearly *ALL* of their shows are On Demand now which is instant access to all of their shows. Generally speaking (for people who use HBO On Demand), this has been extremely popular, maybe this is why HBO is still not being sold on iTunes? Why download when you have access to nearly all of the HBO content for free and instantaneous?
That's interesting. Apple doesn't have a subscription model - so this kind of service isn't on iTunes.
But it is something iTunes/iTV would be able to easily do (technically). I could subscribe to HBO On Demand for $10/mth (or whatever) without paying for a full cable service.
I guess the problem with a subscription model is, for now, the cost of bandwidth to Apple. A bittorrent-like sharing system might solve that.
That's interesting. Apple doesn't have a subscription model - so this kind of service isn't on iTunes.
But it is something iTunes/iTV would be able to easily do (technically). I could subscribe to HBO On Demand for $10/mth (or whatever) without paying for a full cable service.
I guess the problem with a subscription model is, for now, the cost of bandwidth to Apple. A bittorrent-like sharing system might solve that.
MicroByte
Sep 14, 12:21 PM
I went to BB yesterday and I saw the Grip Vue, but I was disappointed that they only have sharp colors. What happened to the colors from the 2G/3G??
No kidding! You would have thourhg a basic color would have been included in the line up!
I'm tempted by the green now, it would definitely be easier for me to find around the house when I misplace it!
No kidding! You would have thourhg a basic color would have been included in the line up!
I'm tempted by the green now, it would definitely be easier for me to find around the house when I misplace it!
WildPalms
Jan 13, 01:08 AM
this is crap,
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
Bluetooth headphones?
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
Bluetooth headphones?
kepner
Mar 31, 02:13 AM
Launchpad is now an app in the Applications folder, and can be removed from the Dock.
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
rmhop81
Sep 7, 05:41 PM
well the problem is that sub accounts cannot exist without the main account and main account has to be renewed every year. so this essentially means i cannot use family pack by myself for 5 years.
i never said that u could go 5 years off one family pack. i simply posted those bc people were complaining about apple's price....newegg is cheaper so order from there for the exact same product....
i never said that u could go 5 years off one family pack. i simply posted those bc people were complaining about apple's price....newegg is cheaper so order from there for the exact same product....
Bacong
Oct 21, 06:15 PM
Got my switcheasy colors case. It's awesome. I love having all the ports connected :D
skiltrip
Oct 5, 08:25 PM
Glad you're getting one!! It fits really well and won't slip out compared to the silicone case. I don't understand why Belkin can't make some normal colors, though. The bright colors look nice, but I would NOT want to be seen around with it under certain occasions. ;)
Best Buy ended up screwing me. I went to pick up the Night Sky grip vue, and they had the pink one pulled for me. Then they went to look for the 2 Night Sky ones they said they had in stock, but they found nothing. So I walked out empty handed. But I did go back today and pick up the Aqua colored one because they went on sale for 19.99. I don't hate the Aqua, don't love it either though. If the Night Sky ends up in stock in the next 30 days, I'm exchanging it. But for now, I like the case, just want the volume buttons to loosen up a bit. And I got tired of the Hong Kong silicone collection I had bought for it. Feels good to have a case that's easy on and off, that stays on, grips in the hands, but slides in the pocket.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/front.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/back.jpg
Best Buy ended up screwing me. I went to pick up the Night Sky grip vue, and they had the pink one pulled for me. Then they went to look for the 2 Night Sky ones they said they had in stock, but they found nothing. So I walked out empty handed. But I did go back today and pick up the Aqua colored one because they went on sale for 19.99. I don't hate the Aqua, don't love it either though. If the Night Sky ends up in stock in the next 30 days, I'm exchanging it. But for now, I like the case, just want the volume buttons to loosen up a bit. And I got tired of the Hong Kong silicone collection I had bought for it. Feels good to have a case that's easy on and off, that stays on, grips in the hands, but slides in the pocket.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/front.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4387684/back.jpg
Snowy_River
Nov 15, 11:31 AM
...Most applications are mutli-threaded that isnt the issue. The difference between 4-core and 8-core will be negligible as you can see from the benchmarks...
Uh... maybe we were looking at two different articles.
First off, most applications are not multi-threaded. It's only Pro level applications that tend to be, and even there, there are plenty that aren't. So, multi-threading is an issue.
Second, you say that the difference between 4-core and 8-core is negligible? Take a look at the PyMOL molecular modeling rendering performance! Under OS X with 4-cores, it took 11.18 seconds, whereas with 8-cores it took 6.8 seconds. That's a raw improvement of about 65%! It's a clock speed weighted improvement of about 85%! How on Earth can you consider gains like THAT negligible?!?
Sheesh!
Edit: Corrected a math error.
Uh... maybe we were looking at two different articles.
First off, most applications are not multi-threaded. It's only Pro level applications that tend to be, and even there, there are plenty that aren't. So, multi-threading is an issue.
Second, you say that the difference between 4-core and 8-core is negligible? Take a look at the PyMOL molecular modeling rendering performance! Under OS X with 4-cores, it took 11.18 seconds, whereas with 8-cores it took 6.8 seconds. That's a raw improvement of about 65%! It's a clock speed weighted improvement of about 85%! How on Earth can you consider gains like THAT negligible?!?
Sheesh!
Edit: Corrected a math error.
Tyler23
Mar 31, 07:47 AM
I'm pretty sure I'm the only one that really likes the look of the new ical
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:11 PM
Try again what ? It's not a word mark, it's a typed drawing, meaning you could trademark Pet Store too if it is a different drawing all together (different font, different shape, different color).
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
Mainyehc
Nov 28, 01:08 PM
Money talks. A big ad campaign will produce much increased Zune sales.
And it's also true for Apple. Many people buy iPods because they have seen all of those TV ads and billboards, not because they did extensive comparison shopping.
Come to think of it, a good number of iPod purchasers are filling demands of their kids, who specifically plead for iPods. And kids are greatly influenced by advertising.
Which kids? The same kids who are specifically pleading for MacBooks? ... Windows, and the ever-uncool Microsoft is getting long in the tooth (and those who may want Vista will have to start thinking about replacing their old PCs anyway), and and the Zune is too late in the game. It doesn't matter that they have 95% of PC marketshare and a lot of money to burn. So did the Roman Empire, for that matter (money, not marketshare :p )! Remember what that guy from Creative said about "spending billions on advertising"? Dit it work? They even had to resort to a foul patent infringement lawsuit to earn some cash and keep afloat!
Sure, if there's a company that can easily perform a media-blitz, it's Microsoft, but OTOH, if there's a company which is ALREADY doing it (try "doing it from day one"), it's Apple... It's actually quite impressive for such a small company! But then again, everything Apple does is quite impressive on its own. ;)
Anyway, isn't Apple historically a very marketing-happy company? "1984", "Lemmings", "Think Different", "Switch", "Silhouettes", now the "Get a Mac" campaign... Unlike a company we know, which is almost exclusively marketing-driven (FUD, vaporware, "Office Dinossaurs", "Start... something... whatever"... "Welcome to the Social", WTF?... :rolleyes: ). Apple has a top notch product, and M$ does not. And they will certainly respond if M$ even attempts doing something that remotely resembles a media-blitz, and will certainly come out on top (especially if, as a product-driven company that they are, they keep coming up with a stream of new, competitive iPods...).
The Zune is DOA, I'm afraid... And Microsoft isn't looking too good, either, and even though they'll still be around 10-15 years from now, they probably won't reach their 50th anniversary (unlike Apple, I'm guessing)... I might be wrong, but IMHO, this whole Zune-to-be debacle will be the first (or is it?) among many nails in M$'s coffin, because in this case they initially set out to compete with an established and nearly invincible leader, unlike their constant (and not that successful) attempts at controling emerging markets. Honestly, why does M$ keeps trying to "innovate" on each and every market, instead of just focusing on the PC platform? They are only making fools of themselves by reusing (our outright copying) other companies' designs, by slapping stock photos and un-catchy slogans all over their software and websites, etc... :rolleyes:
People may have fallen for their lines for 20+ years, but they may one day wise up as far as the PC market is concerned, I hope (of course, someone would have to come up with a viable Windows competitor, whether Apple's own OS X - not very likely for reasons everyone in this board is more than aware of -, or some OSS driven platform, who knows?)... Because they're already showing signs of that on the consumer electronics market. :cool:
And it's also true for Apple. Many people buy iPods because they have seen all of those TV ads and billboards, not because they did extensive comparison shopping.
Come to think of it, a good number of iPod purchasers are filling demands of their kids, who specifically plead for iPods. And kids are greatly influenced by advertising.
Which kids? The same kids who are specifically pleading for MacBooks? ... Windows, and the ever-uncool Microsoft is getting long in the tooth (and those who may want Vista will have to start thinking about replacing their old PCs anyway), and and the Zune is too late in the game. It doesn't matter that they have 95% of PC marketshare and a lot of money to burn. So did the Roman Empire, for that matter (money, not marketshare :p )! Remember what that guy from Creative said about "spending billions on advertising"? Dit it work? They even had to resort to a foul patent infringement lawsuit to earn some cash and keep afloat!
Sure, if there's a company that can easily perform a media-blitz, it's Microsoft, but OTOH, if there's a company which is ALREADY doing it (try "doing it from day one"), it's Apple... It's actually quite impressive for such a small company! But then again, everything Apple does is quite impressive on its own. ;)
Anyway, isn't Apple historically a very marketing-happy company? "1984", "Lemmings", "Think Different", "Switch", "Silhouettes", now the "Get a Mac" campaign... Unlike a company we know, which is almost exclusively marketing-driven (FUD, vaporware, "Office Dinossaurs", "Start... something... whatever"... "Welcome to the Social", WTF?... :rolleyes: ). Apple has a top notch product, and M$ does not. And they will certainly respond if M$ even attempts doing something that remotely resembles a media-blitz, and will certainly come out on top (especially if, as a product-driven company that they are, they keep coming up with a stream of new, competitive iPods...).
The Zune is DOA, I'm afraid... And Microsoft isn't looking too good, either, and even though they'll still be around 10-15 years from now, they probably won't reach their 50th anniversary (unlike Apple, I'm guessing)... I might be wrong, but IMHO, this whole Zune-to-be debacle will be the first (or is it?) among many nails in M$'s coffin, because in this case they initially set out to compete with an established and nearly invincible leader, unlike their constant (and not that successful) attempts at controling emerging markets. Honestly, why does M$ keeps trying to "innovate" on each and every market, instead of just focusing on the PC platform? They are only making fools of themselves by reusing (our outright copying) other companies' designs, by slapping stock photos and un-catchy slogans all over their software and websites, etc... :rolleyes:
People may have fallen for their lines for 20+ years, but they may one day wise up as far as the PC market is concerned, I hope (of course, someone would have to come up with a viable Windows competitor, whether Apple's own OS X - not very likely for reasons everyone in this board is more than aware of -, or some OSS driven platform, who knows?)... Because they're already showing signs of that on the consumer electronics market. :cool:
Porchland
Jul 19, 08:54 AM
I've watched every movie I own at least 15x, and most of them many more than that. I for one won't rent from itunes, I'd rather not is all. If they make money off of it, more power to them
I think rental is probably a bigger market, but there are plenty of people like you that want to keep the movie forever. I would like to see Apple come up with a dual model that allows you to rent a movie for 48 hours that will play on all platforms or buy the movie outright.
The PPV model for $4 a pop seems to make more sense for iTunes than the Netflix model of so many movies at a time.
I think rental is probably a bigger market, but there are plenty of people like you that want to keep the movie forever. I would like to see Apple come up with a dual model that allows you to rent a movie for 48 hours that will play on all platforms or buy the movie outright.
The PPV model for $4 a pop seems to make more sense for iTunes than the Netflix model of so many movies at a time.
Peterson8765
Sep 18, 10:49 PM
Nope, it's those 99 cents silicone case from HK!
What is HK?
What is HK?
CorvusCamenarum
Mar 21, 11:36 PM
I think that allowing Gaddafi to remain in power at this point is not an option for anything but the immediate short-term. But it is the Libyan people who ultimately must remove him. The rebels' policy is ending the Gaddafi regime, and they have refused to negotiate on that point. Currently they have a strong hand - as long as they can keep Gaddafi at bay (effectively with coalition help) he will go nowhere. At best he can try to hold on to Tripoli and the remaining loyalist towns. Any attempt to re-take rebel-held territory will be opposed by both the rebels and the UN-mandated coalition.
The smart thing to have done would have been to sit this one out, then make nicey-nice with the victors. Why we think the Arab common masses will suddenly love us once we go in with bombs flying and reduce a sizable portion of their country to parking lot status is beyond me.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
The smart thing to have done would have been to sit this one out, then make nicey-nice with the victors. Why we think the Arab common masses will suddenly love us once we go in with bombs flying and reduce a sizable portion of their country to parking lot status is beyond me.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
theBB
Jul 19, 08:22 PM
Well, during 2000-2001 that was a long waiting period for OSX... and then of course during the Q4 of 2001 we had 9-11
No, 9-11 happened in Q1 of 2002 according to Apple's fiscal calendar.
Vista sucks, there is very little incentive for people to upgrade. Leopard will ROCK, is a lot faster then Tiger and has a lot of new functionality.
Take a pill... Vista may not better than Tiger, but it certainly is better than XP.
No, 9-11 happened in Q1 of 2002 according to Apple's fiscal calendar.
Vista sucks, there is very little incentive for people to upgrade. Leopard will ROCK, is a lot faster then Tiger and has a lot of new functionality.
Take a pill... Vista may not better than Tiger, but it certainly is better than XP.
PBF
Apr 3, 02:31 AM
Stickies contents are now scrollable. I think this was the case in DP1 as well.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:38 PM
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
DStaal
Sep 7, 11:34 AM
On the rental vs. purchase argument...
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
FreeState
Mar 23, 06:29 PM
Interesting. So, how large of a group does a "special interest" have to be for it to cease being "special?" :rolleyes:
I think that one thing a lot of people have missed is a very palatable shift in how anti-gay groups are viewed after the passage of Prop 8. No longer is using your religious beliefs to deny civil rights to gays and lesbians seen as acceptable, it's now joined the ranks of racism and many hate groups who rightfully are not given an elevated place in a civilized society. Prop 8 has been called Stonewall 2.0, but I think it is more like the first Stonewall for those outside of the gay community. It woke a lot of people up to how the GLBT community is treated by an oppressive majority (in the last year they are no longer the majority, a tipping point has been reached and hopefully there is no turning back).
I think that one thing a lot of people have missed is a very palatable shift in how anti-gay groups are viewed after the passage of Prop 8. No longer is using your religious beliefs to deny civil rights to gays and lesbians seen as acceptable, it's now joined the ranks of racism and many hate groups who rightfully are not given an elevated place in a civilized society. Prop 8 has been called Stonewall 2.0, but I think it is more like the first Stonewall for those outside of the gay community. It woke a lot of people up to how the GLBT community is treated by an oppressive majority (in the last year they are no longer the majority, a tipping point has been reached and hopefully there is no turning back).
kjjnk
Apr 12, 09:17 PM
Wow, it looks absolutely stunning.
BJB Productions
Apr 12, 10:09 PM
...and what about the rest of the Pro apps? Just wondering.
appleguy123
Jun 22, 09:11 PM
Ah yes. A porn free, tightly censored, code controlled desktop machine. That's what everyone wants right? :rolleyes:
Actually maybe.
Actually maybe.
SuperCachetes
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights...
Probably because they are "normal" persons. :rolleyes:
Agreed!
You fell into the "no emoticons" trap as well. LOL. There's sarcasm in the post you just agreed to.
Probably because they are "normal" persons. :rolleyes:
Agreed!
You fell into the "no emoticons" trap as well. LOL. There's sarcasm in the post you just agreed to.
captmatt
Mar 25, 03:56 PM
Oh man---I got the iPad to get the kids off the TV. Now I'm going to have to get another TV!